LEGISLATOR’S DEBTS

Hawke's Bay Tribune, Volume XXI, Issue 303, 7 December 1931, Page 5

LEGISLATOR’S DEBTS

MONEY FOR CREDITORS. , COURT ORDERS £4 A WEEK. In a reserved judgment delivered recently in Sydney the Federal Judge in Bankruptcy, Mr. Justice Lukin, ordered that Mr. R. J. Stuart Robertson, M.L.A., should pay £4 a week out of his Parliamentary allowance for distribution among his creditors. The Judge said that an application had been made by the trustee, under the Bankruptcy Act, for the direction of the Court as to what amount of £576 per annum receivable by the bankrupt as a member of the Legislative Assembly of New South Wales should be received by the trustee for distribution among the bankrupt’s creditors. The bankrupt, said His Honour, was a married man, living with his wife and family, consisting of two adult daughters and one son, aged 14 years. Before the order of sequestration, which was made on April 9, 1931, he was and had been for many years a member of the Legislative Assembly. On November 14, 1930, being in financial difficulties, he executed a deed of arrangement in which he agreed to pay the trustees out of his salary or any moneys received by him a definite sum monthly for distribution among his creditors. That sum was increased later up to £l6 a month, then finally, on the hearing of a bankruptcy petition against him, ho offered to make a payment of £24 a month. Since that date the allowance had been reduced by an amending Act of Parliament, so that he now received only £576 per annum. It was contended by counsel for the bankrupt that the exercise of the power under the Act in regard to a person having the privilege of Parliament would be ultra vires the Constitution, because “it would be an interference with the true function of government ■ —functions that would involve either legislative duties, judicial duties, or executive duties,” because “it would be an interference with the Constitution of the State.” After quoting various authorities, His Honour said: “It would, therefore, seem to be very clear, on the authorities, that, so far as the Parliamentarv allowance exceeds what is sufficient to maintain the bankrupt, his wife and family, this allowance is distributable among his creditors. “It has been suggested,” Mr. Justice Lukin went on, “that the Court should have regard to the dignity of the position and to the calls that are made on a member of Parliament to contribute to various charitable purposes. Should not the member, as well as the Court, pay due regard to the principle that a person should be just before he is generous and to the fact that generosity with other people’s money is not an act of charity even if politically expedient?”